NDAA would require women to register for the draft

[Shaggy Dog Story]

I do not think we disagree. The reason nobody even contemplates an invasion of the United States is that it would be suicide. Nobody could get close enough. We have the best detection hardware hands down and the ability to project force from a superior distance. We'd simply sink anyone that tried. Our existing military force is sufficient to protect ourselves and fulfil our obligations.

Again, apparently not consider the conditions our sailors are suffering. Maybe increase the size so they do not have to work 80 hour weeks an never see their families?

If you are suggesting increase the pay and benefits of those that are serving and have served I support this 100%. But to fix a morale problem by conscripting citizens in peacetime? No.

[Salandriagado]

As opposed to, you know, education.

My education gave me no skills beyond academic ones.
It was in fact one of the driving reasons why I wanted to join the Army Reserve.

Then you screwed up your education, if you wanted non-academic skills.

[Novus America]

However it does mean we should retain the contigency. Though we could use it now, we do not have enough troops as it is.

The military disagrees. Just about every military in the world realised years ago that drafted soldiers aren't useful in modern wars.

Not everyone in the military disagrees. And drafted soldiers are not neccesarily of any lower quality in modern war. Especially as you can draft needed specialists who would not otherwise join like doctors and IT types.

[Imperializt Russia]

However it does mean we should retain the contigency. Though we could use it now, we do not have enough troops as it is.

The military disagrees. Just about every military in the world realised years ago that drafted soldiers aren't useful in modern wars.

I'd like some sauce for these chips, please.

I can imagine that statement being true once we encumber it with more qualifiers than light infantry has ammunition.
Inherently, as typed there? No.

[Shaggy Dog Story]

I do not think we disagree. The reason nobody even contemplates an invasion of the United States is that it would be suicide. Nobody could get close enough. We have the best detection hardware hands down and the ability to project force from a superior distance. We'd simply sink anyone that tried. Our existing military force is sufficient to protect ourselves and fulfil our obligations.

As well as that, there is no point in doing so. Even subtracting US military resistance (and before you suggest it, yes, I'm including civilian militias there), it's more effort than it's worth.

Who are the two global strategic threats to "the west" in the world?
Russia.
China.

Russia has Europe. China has East Asia.
Alternatively, they could invade each other if they really wanted to. Or fight over resources in Africa, which is stretching reason and logic to Tom Clancy levels.

What the fuck do they need to invade the US for?

Well we have significant natural resources and abundant fertile land. The United States is actually a quite nice military target. One that nobody would ever try to claim as it would be futile tof even try.

[Novus America]

Again, apparently not consider the conditions our sailors are suffering. Maybe increase the size so they do not have to work 80 hour weeks an never see their families?

If you are suggesting increase the pay and benefits of those that are serving and have served I support this 100%. But to fix a morale problem by conscripting citizens in peacetime? No.

Pay alone is not the issue! More pay does not help them see their family more or work fewer hours! We need shot dryer working hours and a less insane deployment schedule. Only people, not pay can solve the issue.

And it is not peacetime!

[Shaggy Dog Story]

My education gave me no skills beyond academic ones.
It was in fact one of the driving reasons why I wanted to join the Army Reserve.

Then you screwed up your education, if you wanted non-academic skills.

The military is a great career choice if it gives you what you want to have. My career began in the military.

[Imperializt Russia]

My education gave me no skills beyond academic ones.
It was in fact one of the driving reasons why I wanted to join the Army Reserve.

Then you screwed up your education, if you wanted non-academic skills.

I'm not saying I'd rather have been a metalworker than a physicist, I just expect, now, that my state education should have furnished me with some form of non-academic skill. A balance.

I blame the over-emphasis on service skills (as in IT, skills which absolutely no-one else in my cohort at school seemed to get either since at the last minute we basically forced the school to change our programme from a full to a half GCSE in IT) and pure academic focus under the Blair government. I feel now that it was misguided over-emphasis.

[Shaggy Dog Story]

If you are suggesting increase the pay and benefits of those that are serving and have served I support this 100%. But to fix a morale problem by conscripting citizens in peacetime? No.

Pay alone is not the issue! More pay does not help them see their family more or work fewer hours! We need shot dryer working hours and a less insane deployment schedule. Only people, not pay can solve the issue.

And it is not peacetime!

It is peacetime. The US is involved in peacekeeping activities as it often is, but not any war.

Increasing pay results in more recruits.

[Imperializt Russia]

As well as that, there is no point in doing so. Even subtracting US military resistance (and before you suggest it, yes, I'm including civilian militias there), it's more effort than it's worth.

Who are the two global strategic threats to "the west" in the world?
Russia.
China.

Russia has Europe. China has East Asia.
Alternatively, they could invade each other if they really wanted to. Or fight over resources in Africa, which is stretching reason and logic to Tom Clancy levels.

What the fuck do they need to invade the US for?

Well we have significant natural resources and abundant fertile land. The United States is actually a quite nice military target. One that nobody would ever try to claim as it would be futile tof even try.

You do.

But China and Russia have equally rich lands that are much more convenient to attack.
There is no point in invading the US even if it melted down every last round of ammunition.

[Sanctissima]

If you are suggesting increase the pay and benefits of those that are serving and have served I support this 100%. But to fix a morale problem by conscripting citizens in peacetime? No.

Pay alone is not the issue! More pay does not help them see their family more or work fewer hours! We need shot dryer working hours and a less insane deployment schedule. Only people, not pay can solve the issue.

And it is not peacetime!

You don't fix that with involuntary service. You fix that by turning the Navy into a more promising career option, and making it more appealing to potential recruits. The absolute last thing you want is a bunch of poorly trained irregulars who don't really want to be there.

[Novus America]

Then you screwed up your education, if you wanted non-academic skills.

I'm not saying I'd rather have been a metalworker than a physicist, I just expect, now, that my state education should have furnished me with some form of non-academic skill. A balance.

I blame the over-emphasis on service skills (as in IT, skills which absolutely no-one else in my cohort at school seemed to get either since at the last minute we basically forced the school to change our programme from a full to a half GCSE in IT) and pure academic focus under the Blair government. I feel now that it was misguided over-emphasis.

You would be best off in the US navy as I believe as you are a nuclear scientist. The Navy is our main source of qualified nuclear power operators.

Edit: disregard my stupid brain fart.

[Shaggy Dog Story]

Well we have significant natural resources and abundant fertile land. The United States is actually a quite nice military target. One that nobody would ever try to claim as it would be futile tof even try.

You do.

But China and Russia have equally rich lands that are much more convenient to attack.
There is no point in invading the US even if it melted down every last round of ammunition.

Ah I see what you're saying, that in terms of pure pragmatism our biggest threats, were they to be in an invading mood, would find it far easier to engage the other not the US, even if there was military parity?

[Novus America]

Pay alone is not the issue! More pay does not help them see their family more or work fewer hours! We need shot dryer working hours and a less insane deployment schedule. Only people, not pay can solve the issue.

And it is not peacetime!

You don't fix that with involuntary service. You fix that by turning the Navy into a more promising career option, and making it more appealing to potential recruits. The absolute last thing you want is a bunch of poorly trained irregulars who don't really want to be there.

Again conscripts do not have to be poorly trained. Israeli troops are not poorly trained irregulars.

Also you have to make it like Israel, universal and expected. If people grow up expecting it you are not suprised by it.

I admit it is not politically feasible though at this point.

[Imperializt Russia]

I'm not saying I'd rather have been a metalworker than a physicist, I just expect, now, that my state education should have furnished me with some form of non-academic skill. A balance.

I blame the over-emphasis on service skills (as in IT, skills which absolutely no-one else in my cohort at school seemed to get either since at the last minute we basically forced the school to change our programme from a full to a half GCSE in IT) and pure academic focus under the Blair government. I feel now that it was misguided over-emphasis.

You would be best off in the US navy as I believe as you are a nuclear scientist. The Navy is our main source of qualified nuclear power operators.

But the UK does not have a navy nuclear power program.

Four Trafalgar submarines, three Astute submarines, three more Astutes under construction and a fourth just launched, four Vanguard submarines and four "Successor" submarines planned to replace Vanguard.

[Shaggy Dog Story]

I'm not saying I'd rather have been a metalworker than a physicist, I just expect, now, that my state education should have furnished me with some form of non-academic skill. A balance.

I blame the over-emphasis on service skills (as in IT, skills which absolutely no-one else in my cohort at school seemed to get either since at the last minute we basically forced the school to change our programme from a full to a half GCSE in IT) and pure academic focus under the Blair government. I feel now that it was misguided over-emphasis.

You would be best off in the US navy as I believe as you are a nuclear scientist. The Navy is our main source of qualified nuclear power operators.

But the UK does not have a navy nuclear power program.

The Astute is nuclear with a few under construction I believe.

[Novus America]

You would be best off in the US navy as I believe as you are a nuclear scientist. The Navy is our main source of qualified nuclear power operators.

But the UK does not have a navy nuclear power program.

Four Trafalgar submarines, three Astute submarines, three more Astutes under construction and a fourth just launched, four Vanguard submarines and four "Successor" submarines planned to replace Vanguard.

Yeah. I feel really stupid now. I was thinking just carriers for some reason. That was dumb.

[Ifreann]

Usually people receive at least some training before being given live grenades. And if untrained conscripts were being given live grenades, then the problem isn't them, the problem is the idiots who decided to issue live grenades to untrained conscripts.

---

So I've heard. Again, this does not mean it is likely you will need to draft people again.

However it does mean we should retain the contigency.

I don't see how. It is neither necessary nor prudent to be prepared for every contingency. You have a smoke detector in your house. You don't have a Sarin gas detector.

Though we could use it now, we do not have enough troops as it is.

Maybe years of seemingly pointless foreign wars have turned people off careers in the armed forces.

---

However it does mean we should retain the contigency. Though we could use it now, we do not have enough troops as it is.

Enough troops for what? The United States has by a significant margin the most powerful military in the world. What national threats do we face to our sovereignty that would compel conscription?

The combined forces of the System Lords.

---

I do not think we disagree. The reason nobody even contemplates an invasion of the United States is that it would be suicide. Nobody could get close enough. We have the best detection hardware hands down and the ability to project force from a superior distance. We'd simply sink anyone that tried. Our existing military force is sufficient to protect ourselves and fulfil our obligations.

As well as that, there is no point in doing so. Even subtracting US military resistance (and before you suggest it, yes, I'm including civilian militias there), it's more effort than it's worth.

Who are the two global strategic threats to "the west" in the world?
Russia.
China.

Russia has Europe. China has East Asia.
Alternatively, they could invade each other if they really wanted to. Or fight over resources in Africa, which is stretching reason and logic to Tom Clancy levels.

What the fuck do they need to invade the US for?

To take control of the freedom mines?

[Imperializt Russia]

Four Trafalgar submarines, three Astute submarines, three more Astutes under construction and a fourth just launched, four Vanguard submarines and four "Successor" submarines planned to replace Vanguard.

Yeah. I feel really stupid now. I was thinking just carriers for some reason. That was dumb.

We did decide against our new carriers being nuclear boats on cost grounds, so fair assumption.

[Shaggy Dog Story]

You would be best off in the US navy as I believe as you are a nuclear scientist. The Navy is our main source of qualified nuclear power operators.

But the UK does not have a navy nuclear power program.

Four Trafalgar submarines, three Astute submarines, three more Astutes under construction and a fourth just launched, four Vanguard submarines and four "Successor" submarines planned to replace Vanguard.

Beaten to the punch. Forgot that Trafalgar was nuclear.

[Tyska]

Hurry! Age faster before Uncle Sam comes to shave your head!

If the war doesn't start by November 8th, 2016... I'm in the good.

Judging by how things are going you might be out of luck.
Off you go to the eastern front. *Taps her buttock*

[Novus America]

Yeah. I feel really stupid now. I was thinking just carriers for some reason. That was dumb.

We did decide against our new carriers being nuclear boats on cost grounds, so fair assumption.

Yeah, but I know you guys have nuke subs. So I was still stupid.

[Novus America]

Four Trafalgar submarines, three Astute submarines, three more Astutes under construction and a fourth just launched, four Vanguard submarines and four "Successor" submarines planned to replace Vanguard.

Beaten to the punch. Forgot that Trafalgar was nuclear.

I was a dumbass.

Funny story. Two Marines I knew screwed up land nav. The gunnery sergeant was yelling at them, asking how they missed so many waypoints.

The both stood at attention and said "We are dumbasses Gunnery Sergeant!"

Taken aback, Gunny replied. "Very well, carry on."

[Sanctissima]

You don't fix that with involuntary service. You fix that by turning the Navy into a more promising career option, and making it more appealing to potential recruits. The absolute last thing you want is a bunch of poorly trained irregulars who don't really want to be there.

Again conscripts do not have to be poorly trained. Also you have to make it like Israel, universal and expected. If people grow up expecting it you are not suprised by it.

I admit it is not politically feasible though at this point.

Eh, that only really makes sense in countries where all your neighbours hate your guts and would, if given the opportunity, invade you. I mean, sure, there's some less extreme examples like Norway and even Switzerland, but they're the exception to the rule.

But even if the US were to go the Norwegian or Swiss route, I hardly see the point. What you want in a military is long-term professional soldiers who won't be gone after a two-year period of service. Conscription offers few benefits to developed countries that aren't in a state of perpetual warfare.

[Shaggy Dog Story]

The move to nuclear subs but not carriers is understandable as there are significant tactical reasons for a submarine to get off diesel that aren't as relevant to a carrier.